Comments on: The Paradox in Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/ On a Quest for Personal Freedom Sat, 17 May 2008 01:09:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3 By: scott http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-58098 scott Sat, 24 Nov 2007 19:10:49 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-58098 excuse me, but , maybe the problem is the nature of the way we do employment and the nature of the resulting process of acquiring those basic needs . Maybe getting rid of the risk-takers would get rid of the risks.? I mean , employment; (trading our labor for other things we need), has in its present incarnation, the necessity of giving most of the produce of that labor to a risk-taking entrpreneur , more likely a collective corporate "person". I say screw them , the workers should own the company . Not only does that risk-taker extraordinaire take that portion of your labor , but then ,his psycho-pathological twin extorts a little more 'profit ' from you every time that you go to trade that labor equivalant (money) for those basic need items . And the big ticket items like a house or a car or an education is where any real hope of a peaceful sense of security gets shot permanently all to hell. I say socialise our banking system , cause if there is such a thing as natural interest, it's a common property sort of thing and should be collectively applied to providing basic needs to the owners of the money (the worker). Screw the bankers and be free, I say. The topic of risk-takers and the romanticising of this is something that irks me cuz most risk-takers lose their ass , but if you allow them to play in your economic game One of the stupid bastards will always win the biggest prise cuz thats the only thing they want to win - Just look at our president - What could exemplify a risk-taker more than someone from the oil industry. Ya spend a $million or so to find out if there is oil a mile beneath the ground over here and then over there ,Wasnt none, Oh well, wasnt my money anyway! There are political things we could do to make lifes acquisition process of the basic needs items an easier task. We could make it impossible for large corporations to monopolise the land that people need for homes , crops , businesses. We could subsidise farm tractors so that poor people could farm instead of paying farmers not to grow stuff. there has got to be a million things we could do to make the citizenry more happy, content , civilised and actualised but our Elite risk-takers billionaires club that runs this country wants that surplus population that Marx talked about . Thats why they want to let the poor mexicans in -they need poor unactualised people . And there is a way to maintain your economic security - just dont give so much of the produce of your labor to Mr. Moneybags or his govt. Has halliburton been actualised ? how about exxon ? the carlyle group? I rest my case ! excuse me, but , maybe the problem is the nature of the way we do
employment
and the nature of the resulting process of acquiring those basic
needs .
Maybe getting rid of the risk-takers would get rid of the risks.?
I mean , employment; (trading our labor for other things we need),
has in its present incarnation, the necessity of giving most of the produce
of that labor to a risk-taking entrpreneur , more likely a collective corporate “person”.
I say screw them , the workers should own the company .
Not only does that risk-taker extraordinaire take that
portion of your labor , but then ,his psycho-pathological twin extorts a
little more ‘profit ‘ from you every time that you go to trade that labor equivalant (money)
for those basic need items .
And the big ticket items like a house or a car or an education is where any real hope of a
peaceful sense of security gets shot permanently all to hell.
I say socialise our banking system , cause if there is such a thing as natural
interest, it’s a common property sort
of thing and should be collectively applied to providing basic needs to the owners of the money (the worker).
Screw the bankers and be free, I say.
The topic of risk-takers and the romanticising of this is something that irks me cuz
most risk-takers lose their ass , but if you allow them to play in your economic
game One of the stupid bastards will
always win the biggest prise cuz thats the only thing they want to win - Just look at our president -
What could exemplify a risk-taker more than someone from the oil industry.
Ya spend a $million or so to find out if there is oil a mile beneath the ground over here and then over there ,Wasnt none, Oh well, wasnt my money anyway!
There are political things we could do to make lifes acquisition process of the
basic needs items an easier task.
We could make it impossible for large corporations to monopolise the land that
people need for homes , crops , businesses.
We could subsidise farm tractors so that poor people could farm instead of paying farmers not
to grow stuff.
there has got to be a million things we could do to make the citizenry more
happy, content , civilised and actualised
but our Elite risk-takers billionaires club that runs this country wants
that surplus population that Marx talked about .
Thats why they want to let the poor mexicans in -they need poor unactualised people .
And there is a way to maintain your economic security - just dont give so much of the produce of your labor to Mr. Moneybags or his govt.
Has halliburton been actualised ? how about exxon ? the carlyle group?
I rest my case !

]]> By: Grant Czerepak http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-53738 Grant Czerepak Sun, 11 Nov 2007 08:23:48 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-53738 There is no paradox in Maslow's hierarchy. Maslow's hierarchy are the transitions in a cycle. You ascend the hierarchy as part of the induction into a state of transcendence and you descend the hierarchy as part of the deduction of a new state. In otherwords Maslow's hierarchy is not about a single ascent but a series of incremental ascents. There is no paradox in Maslow’s hierarchy. Maslow’s hierarchy are the transitions in a cycle. You ascend the hierarchy as part of the induction into a state of transcendence and you descend the hierarchy as part of the deduction of a new state. In otherwords Maslow’s hierarchy is not about a single ascent but a series of incremental ascents.

]]> By: Steve http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-50803 Steve Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:25:33 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-50803 Ian, The top of the pyramid I was referring to isn't necessarily the economic pyramid. I was referring to Maslow's Pyramid in the graphic used in my post. It is defined as "Morality, spontaneity, creativity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, and acceptance." I am happy for you folks in Europe. But it still takes a massive amount of productivity from those at the top of the economic heap to create the security for those at the bottom. So far so good in some Western European democracies. I love the way you care for each other and I hope it works out well for you in the long run, but I'm afraid it is just wishful thinking. Have you ever read Johan Norberg the Swedish economist? <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5633239795464137680">I love him... You should watch this video.</a> Ian,
The top of the pyramid I was referring to isn’t necessarily the economic pyramid. I was referring to Maslow’s Pyramid in the graphic used in my post. It is defined as “Morality, spontaneity, creativity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, and acceptance.”

I am happy for you folks in Europe. But it still takes a massive amount of productivity from those at the top of the economic heap to create the security for those at the bottom. So far so good in some Western European democracies. I love the way you care for each other and I hope it works out well for you in the long run, but I’m afraid it is just wishful thinking.

Have you ever read Johan Norberg the Swedish economist?
I love him… You should watch this video.

]]> By: ian in hamburg http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-50733 ian in hamburg Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:59:43 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-50733 Steve, Been away on holidays, but back to your comment: If a higher percentage of people get to the top of the pyramid the less need we would have for a social safety net. The top of the pyramid is by definition a narrow place, which only a few will attain. In a rat-race dog-eat-dog world, those who don't attain the top of the pyramid will get trampled upon. Like I said, it's all political. I would rather live in Europe and make less money, knowing my higher taxes are going toward a more just society. It's simply a more humane way to live. Steve,
Been away on holidays, but back to your comment: If a higher percentage of people get to the top of the pyramid the less need we would have for a social safety net.
The top of the pyramid is by definition a narrow place, which only a few will attain. In a rat-race dog-eat-dog world, those who don’t attain the top of the pyramid will get trampled upon. Like I said, it’s all political. I would rather live in Europe and make less money, knowing my higher taxes are going toward a more just society. It’s simply a more humane way to live.

]]> By: Tueksta http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-50356 Tueksta Fri, 26 Oct 2007 22:19:19 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-50356 Hi, i don't see your chain of reasoning to all extent here. You've stated "economic growth [..] is the foundation for reaching the top of Maslows pyramid". Some other website states that "It's time to discard the outdated notion that more economic growth automatically equals greater wellbeing." and I think this is what the hierarchy says, too. Once your safety needs are fulfilled, you can care about other, higher things. What's wrong with eating fish, without owning the boats? Haven't you heard that the citizens of bangladesh are among the most happy in the world? They own shit, for all I know. The hierarchy of needs shouldn't be confused with liberal ideas of "rich equals happy" or something, on the contrary. But thanks for pitching in this new perspective. cheers Hi, i don’t see your chain of reasoning to all extent here. You’ve stated “economic growth [..] is the foundation for reaching the top of Maslows pyramid”. Some other website states that “It’s time to discard the outdated notion that more economic growth automatically equals greater wellbeing.” and I think this is what the hierarchy says, too. Once your safety needs are fulfilled, you can care about other, higher things. What’s wrong with eating fish, without owning the boats? Haven’t you heard that the citizens of bangladesh are among the most happy in the world? They own shit, for all I know. The hierarchy of needs shouldn’t be confused with liberal ideas of “rich equals happy” or something, on the contrary.

But thanks for pitching in this new perspective.

cheers

]]> By: Conal Elliott http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47505 Conal Elliott Fri, 12 Oct 2007 17:56:04 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47505 "The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise." - Tacitus “The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.” - Tacitus

]]> By: Steve http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47143 Steve Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:54:15 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47143 Ian, <blockquote>Besides, I really don't see how reaching the top of the heap financially translates into enjoying the benefits of the pyramid. I can be a pauper and still be creative. Haven't many great artists died penniless?</blockquote> I completely agree with you here. If you can be self-actualized and homeless and penniless? great. But the truth is... most of us can't. I like what Wallace D Wattles says - <Blockquote>I do not say that you should be hard hearted or unkind, and refuse to hear the cry of need; but you must not try to eradicate poverty in any of the conventional ways. Put poverty behind you, and put all that pertains to it behind you, and "make good." Get rich; that is the best way you can help the poor. And you cannot hold the mental image which is to make you rich if you fill your mind with pictures of poverty. Do not read books or papers which give circumstantial accounts of the wretchedness of the tenement dwellers, of the horrors of child labor, and so on. Do not read anything which fills your mind with gloomy images of want and suffering. You cannot help the poor in the least by knowing about these things; and the wide-spread knowledge of them does not tend at all to do away with poverty. What tends to do away with poverty is not the getting of pictures of poverty into your mind, but getting pictures of wealth into the minds of the poor. You are not deserting the poor in their misery when you refuse to allow your mind to be filled with pictures of that misery. Poverty can be done away with, not by increasing the number of well to do people who think about poverty, but by increasing the number of poor people who purpose with faith to get rich. The poor do not need charity; they need inspiration. Charity only sends them a loaf of bread to keep them alive in their wretchedness, or gives them an entertainment to make them forget for an hour or two; but inspiration will cause them to rise out of their misery. If you want to help the poor, demonstrate to them that they can become rich; prove it by getting rich yourself. The only way in which poverty will ever be banished from this world is by getting a large and constantly increasing number of people to practice the teachings of this book. People must be taught to become rich by creation, not by competition. Every man who becomes rich by competition throws down behind him the ladder by which he rises, and keeps others down; but every man who gets rich by creation opens a way for thousands to follow him, and inspires them to do so. You are not showing hardness of heart or an unfeeling disposition when you refuse to pity poverty, see poverty, read about poverty, or think or talk about it, or to listen to those who do talk about it. Use your will power to keep your mind OFF the subject of poverty, and to keep it fixed with faith and purpose ON the vision of what you want.</blockquote> Ian,

Besides, I really don’t see how reaching the top of the heap financially translates into enjoying the benefits of the pyramid. I can be a pauper and still be creative. Haven’t many great artists died penniless?

I completely agree with you here. If you can be self-actualized and homeless and penniless? great.

But the truth is… most of us can’t.

I like what Wallace D Wattles says -

I do not say that you should be hard hearted or unkind, and refuse to hear the cry of need; but you must not try to eradicate poverty in any of the conventional ways. Put poverty behind you, and put all that pertains to it behind you, and “make good.”

Get rich; that is the best way you can help the poor.

And you cannot hold the mental image which is to make you rich if you fill your mind with pictures of poverty. Do not read books or papers which give circumstantial accounts of the wretchedness of the tenement dwellers, of the horrors of child labor, and so on. Do not read anything which fills your mind with gloomy images of want and suffering.

You cannot help the poor in the least by knowing about these things; and the wide-spread knowledge of them does not tend at all to do away with poverty.

What tends to do away with poverty is not the getting of pictures of poverty into your mind, but getting pictures of wealth into the minds of the poor.

You are not deserting the poor in their misery when you refuse to allow your mind to be filled with pictures of that misery.

Poverty can be done away with, not by increasing the number of well to do people who think about poverty, but by increasing the number of poor people who purpose with faith to get rich.

The poor do not need charity; they need inspiration. Charity only sends them a loaf of bread to keep them alive in their wretchedness, or gives them an entertainment to make them forget for an hour or two; but inspiration will cause them to rise out of their misery. If you want to help the poor, demonstrate to them that they can become rich; prove it by getting rich yourself.

The only way in which poverty will ever be banished from this world is by getting a large and constantly increasing number of people to practice the teachings of this book.

People must be taught to become rich by creation, not by competition.

Every man who becomes rich by competition throws down behind him the ladder by which he rises, and keeps others down; but every man who gets rich by creation opens a way for thousands to follow him, and inspires them to do so.

You are not showing hardness of heart or an unfeeling disposition when you refuse to pity poverty, see poverty, read about poverty, or think or talk about it, or to listen to those who do talk about it. Use your will power to keep your mind OFF the subject of poverty, and to keep it fixed with faith and purpose ON the vision of what you want.

]]> By: Steve http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47142 Steve Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:33:16 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47142 Ian, I understand your point and many people agree. But what creates the increasing wealth neccessary for the social safety net? Risk taking entreprenuers. If the saftey net is too generous/taxes too oppressive it takes away the incentive to take risks which makes everyone poorer and supplies less for the safety net. There are clear empirical studies that show that the more generous and longer term unemployment benefits are the longer people tend to stay unemployed and the higher the unemployment rate. But enough about economics. That wasn't my point. My point is that if you can't let go of you fear of losing your employment, you probably will never climb the pyramid. And I guess that's okay. But the more people that do reach a point of self-actualization the better off society will be ethically, morally, and economically. Back to your point: If a higher percentage of people get to the top of the pyramid the less need we would have for a social safety net. Ian,
I understand your point and many people agree. But what creates the increasing wealth neccessary for the social safety net? Risk taking entreprenuers. If the saftey net is too generous/taxes too oppressive it takes away the incentive to take risks which makes everyone poorer and supplies less for the safety net. There are clear empirical studies that show that the more generous and longer term unemployment benefits are the longer people tend to stay unemployed and the higher the unemployment rate.

But enough about economics. That wasn’t my point.

My point is that if you can’t let go of you fear of losing your employment, you probably will never climb the pyramid. And I guess that’s okay. But the more people that do reach a point of self-actualization the better off society will be ethically, morally, and economically.

Back to your point:

If a higher percentage of people get to the top of the pyramid the less need we would have for a social safety net.

]]> By: ian in hamburg http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47141 ian in hamburg Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:13:31 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47141 Everything's political, and there is a political element to what you're saying. While it's true that a rising tide raises all boats, so that in a growing economy even the poorest and unskilled will probably find work, and those who are risking more stand a good chance of being rewarded better than those who stay put in their salaried positions, but when the economy goes tits up, who ends up on the street? That's why most European countries with their social model of making sure that even the poorest have Maslow's basic needs covered, including adequate health care, have the better idea. Besides, I really don't see how reaching the top of the heap financially translates into enjoying the benefits of the pyramid. I can be a pauper and still be creative. Haven't many great artists died penniless? Everything’s political, and there is a political element to what you’re saying. While it’s true that a rising tide raises all boats, so that in a growing economy even the poorest and unskilled will probably find work, and those who are risking more stand a good chance of being rewarded better than those who stay put in their salaried positions, but when the economy goes tits up, who ends up on the street? That’s why most European countries with their social model of making sure that even the poorest have Maslow’s basic needs covered, including adequate health care, have the better idea. Besides, I really don’t see how reaching the top of the heap financially translates into enjoying the benefits of the pyramid. I can be a pauper and still be creative. Haven’t many great artists died penniless?

]]> By: Nneka | Spirituality Blog http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47108 Nneka | Spirituality Blog Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:46:11 +0000 http://www.steve-olson.com/the-paradox-in-maslow%e2%80%99s-hierarchy-of-needs/#comment-47108 With all due respect Vnuk, accomplishments! Accomplishments are measured by our perception of them. In the grand scheme of things they mean nothing along with the car and the house. The thing that we have to lose is pride. Yes, we put a lot of effort into getting where we are. (I lump myself in there because I've come a long way too.) However, having gotten to where I was (six-figure job with world travel), taking a look around and realizing that I was more miserable than where I was, I must say that the "accomplishments" amounted to my pride, how I appeared, what my life looked like to the outside world. Fear of losing the pride and the appearance was at the root of the misery. Yes, economic security was a part of it, but I'd been economically insecure and I got myself out of it. It was all a perception. Everything is temporary. We are only enjoying it for a moment. This underlying anxiety only undercuts our enjoyment. It serves to keep us marginally content. We are kept in our place by our own glass ceiling. If I got murdered today I will lose my life. A life that I have finally started living. Thankfully, I will not have any regrets as I am living on my own terms today, as opposed to 5 years ago. With all due respect Vnuk, accomplishments! Accomplishments are measured by our perception of them. In the grand scheme of things they mean nothing along with the car and the house.

The thing that we have to lose is pride. Yes, we put a lot of effort into getting where we are. (I lump myself in there because I’ve come a long way too.) However, having gotten to where I was (six-figure job with world travel), taking a look around and realizing that I was more miserable than where I was, I must say that the “accomplishments” amounted to my pride, how I appeared, what my life looked like to the outside world.

Fear of losing the pride and the appearance was at the root of the misery. Yes, economic security was a part of it, but I’d been economically insecure and I got myself out of it. It was all a perception. Everything is temporary. We are only enjoying it for a moment.

This underlying anxiety only undercuts our enjoyment. It serves to keep us marginally content. We are kept in our place by our own glass ceiling.

If I got murdered today I will lose my life. A life that I have finally started living. Thankfully, I will not have any regrets as I am living on my own terms today, as opposed to 5 years ago.

]]>